Code peer review

[abhishekdeore]

The following is the peer review of the project code by [name of team completing peer review]. The team members that participated in this review are

• [Abhishek Deore] - @[abhishekdeore]
• [Daniel shevelev - @[shahmatyUA]
• [Ram Dheeraj Kamarajugadda] - @[ramdheeraj-uoa]
• [Shreya Kolte] - @[shreyakolte]

• [Kashyap Nadendla] - @[kashyapnadendla]

1. Purpose of Code

• [x] Clearly defined and understood
• [x] Ambiguous or unclear

---

2. Code Quality

• [x] Code is clean, readable, and well-organized
• [x] Adequate comments explaining complex or tricky code sections
• [x] Variables, methods, and classes have meaningful names
• [x] Consistent code style (indentation, naming conventions, etc.)

---

3. Documentation

• [x] Code documentation (e.g., comments) is sufficient
• [x] Readme or other documentation updated if necessary

---

4. Best Practices

• [x] No hardcoded values; constants used appropriately
• [x] Security and privacy concerns addressed (e.g., no sensitive data exposed)
• [x] Code avoids repetition and promotes reusability

---

5. Additional Comments

• The code appears well-organized, but it would benefit from additional explanations for the plots. Some of the plots lack clarity upon initial inspection, and a thorough explanation would enhance their meaningful interpretation.
• Consider avoiding the inclusion of all components in a single file. For instance, segregating the models into a separate file could improve the comprehensibility of different project phases.
• The histogram labeled "Distribution of Hourly Dry Bulb Temperature in Dallas, Denton, Arlington" appears cluttered. Streamlining the presentation to enhance clarity and ease of comprehension is recommended.

---

6. Recommendation

• [x] Approved - ready to be merged
• [x] Approved with minor issues - can be addressed later
• [x] Requires changes - provide feedback and request another review

---

[kendall-beaver]

For the 2nd section, we addressed "Adequate comments explaining complex or tricky code sections".

For the 3rd Section, we've addressed "Readme or other documentation updated if necessary".

Same as Section 4.

Under "Additional Comments," we've updated our plots and made them less cluttered so they're easier to understand upon first inspection, and we've also segregated our models into separate sections within the code so they're easier to read and understand.

[kendall-beaver]

Thanks for all of your feedback. It definitely helped us improve our code and overall project! :)